Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
, we're in this situation because congress came up with what they're calling the fiscal cliff now and they're calling it the fiscal cliff because they don't want to e embrace either the tax increases or spending cuts and i think it's foolish to think this congress can come up with a better deal. >> you know what's interesting, to eric's point, there is a great irony in this that the democrats are saying we've got to raise taxes and the fiscal cliff does both. just not in the way anybody wants it, so if they can't do that, how are they going to find a way they can all agree on? >> the superfailed committee. this is a giant hatchet as opposed to a scalpel. >> it was designed to fail. >> i agree, but the real solution and real irony is going to be the ultimate deal's going to look like the obama boehner grand bargain that was negotiated and almost done in the summer of 2011. the fact that we couldn't make that deal then i think's a tragedy for the country. one of the thing's it did was lead to that aaa downgrading. that was unnecessary. >> let me just follow up on this point of what
if this is not good enough for the white house, we will go over the fiscal cliff. >> this is a compromise on taxes. this is a compromise on mandatory spending. and it's a compromise on discretionary spending over what the select committee had debated. >> i should mention that erskine bowles has put out a statement himself. while i'm flattered the speaker would call something the bowles plan. the outline in the letter the speaker sent to the president does not represent the bowles simpson plan, nor is it the bowles plan in my testimony on deficit reduction. i simply took the mid point of the public offers, put forward during the negotiations to demonstrate where i thought a deal could be reached at the time. he's very much backing away from speaker boehner's letter. the question i wanted to ask you is some of the details, as you know, it's all in. >> can we spin one more point on that? >> absolutely. >> here's speaker boehner who is taking a mid point on the compromise between the two sides and offered it, and it's already flatley rejected? >> i think he may be rejected, sir, if i may -- >> i'm not
if this is not good enough for the white house, we will go over the fiscal cliff because this is a compromise on taxes. this is a compromise on mandatory spending and it's a compromise on discretionary spending over what the select committee had debated. >> the details if we can and i should mention that erskine bowles put out a statement saying this -- does not represent the bowles-simpson plan, nor is it the bowles plan. in my testimony before the joint select committee on deficit reduction, i simply took the midpoint of the public offers to demonstrate where i thought a deal could be reached at the time. he's very much backing away from speaking boehner's letter, but the question i wanted the to ask you -- >> can we spend one more point on that? >> of course. >> what did he say? that was the midpoint of a compromise from the two. so, here's speaker boehner who is taking a new point on the compromise between the two sides and offered it and it's already flatly rejected? >> i think what he might be rejecting, sir, if i may -- >> no, i'm not talking abo about erskine bowles. >> i think what he's sayin
, we should actually have them not leave washington until they fix the fiscal cliff. at least let's fix the fiscal cliff and make sure that american families aren't faced with possible larger tax bills come january. >> wouldn't it just make you feel better if you didn't feel the real reason we'll get a fiscal cliff resolution, whether it's a little tinkering or something bigger, wasn't because they actually wanted to be home on christmas? >> i think that they absolutely should try to get this done. i certainly don't think they should go home before the situation is resolved. but i also think that when you are looking at what kind of congress we want, we want a responsive congress. we want a congress rooted in american communities, not inside the beltway. >> look, you just want mondays and fridays off, too, and your trying to make the argument to the national review as to why that is better. >> americans want their leaders to work, period. >> thanks to both of you. we appreciate it. of course, we want all your feedback. >>> next, the billionaire software tycoon john mcafee is wanted in t
are really looking to their leaders for solutions, especially after this congress. so instead of spending time outside of washington, we should actually have them not leave washington until they fix the fiscal cliff. at least let's fix the fiscal cliff and make sure that american families aren't faced with possible larger tax bills come january. >> wouldn't it just make you feel better if you didn't feel that the real reason we're goeng to get a fiscal cliff resolution, whether tas little tinkering or something bigger wasn't because they wanted to be home for christmas. >> i certainly don't think they should go home before the situation is resolved, but i also think when you're looking at what kind of congress you want, you want a responsive congress, rooted in american communities, not inside the beltway. >> you would want mondays and fridays off, too, and you're trying to make the argument. >> americans want their leaders to work, period. >> thanks to both of you. "outfront" next, breaking news. the billionaire software tycoon is on the run and martin savidge just literally caught him.
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)